On Tue, 2011-08-23, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> At this point, I'm ready to run with the consensus, whatever that is.
Having read the discussion elsethread, I now consider this a blocker and
that also seems to be the consensus. So we can't release 1.7.0 with
this bug; it has to be fixed. That in turn means the supposed 'RC1' is
no longer an RC at all. If the bug were found after RC release, the
process would be different, but we have to draw the line somewhere and
the moment of release is the obvious place to draw it.
Fix it ASAP and release an RC that we believe is a true candidate at the
moment of release.
I think we handled this the right way. Although some of us wanted the
RC to go ahead with the known bug, because we were not convinced it's
serious enough, a developer's veto means it's not an RC. We must
resolve that one way or the other before moving on, even if we don't
like the delay.
Received on 2011-08-24 13:08:12 CEST